Why Selling Your House for God Isn’t as Weird as You Think

“Abdullah Hashem, a beanie-wearing American-Egyptian running what can only be described as a quasi-Islamic doomsday cult based out of a former orphanage in the north of England, claims to be that Mahdi, and for good measure ‘the new Pope.’ If you want to join him, you’ll have to cash in your home and give him all your money.” (VICE)

VICE and The Guardian have delivered what can only be described as the so-called “journalism of the year.” One of their biggest points of contention: Members selling their houses to live communally. But is this concept really so foreign? Is AROPL the only religion that has advocated a concept of communal living?

The idea of a people living with few or no personal belongings in communal or monastic settings is far from new. Across some of the world’s major religions, we see strikingly similar examples to what Abdullah Hashem is calling for today. In an age where owning property is often seen as the ultimate sign of success, it may surprise many to learn that the world’s great religions have long taught that true wealth lies not in hoarded possessions but in community, charity, and spiritual freedom. Throughout history, prophets and sages have called people to give up worldly attachments including houses and land to live closer to one another and to God.

Monasteries  and Christian Orders

During his ministry, Jesus repeatedly encouraged people to let go of their attachment to the material world in order to gain true spiritual life. One of the clearest examples of this teaching is found in the Gospel of Mark, in the story of the rich young man.

In this passage, a wealthy man runs up to Jesus and kneels before him, asking, “Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” Jesus first reminds him of the commandments: do not murder, do not steal, do not lie, honor your father and mother. The man replies that he has kept all these since he was young. But Jesus, looking at him with love, says there is still one thing he lacks: “Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.” (Mark 10:21)

At this, the man’s face falls. He goes away sad, because he has great wealth and cannot bring himself to give it up. Jesus then turns to his disciples and delivers one of his most challenging teachings: “How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God! … It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.” (Mark 10:23–25) Astonished, the disciples ask, “Who then can be saved?” Jesus replies: “With man this is impossible, but not with God; all things are possible with God.” (Mark 10:27)

This passage reveals how deeply Jesus linked spiritual freedom with detachment from material wealth. It was not enough to simply follow moral rules. True discipleship meant total trust in God’s provision, freeing oneself from possessions that create false security. The challenge still echoes today: to follow Jesus fully means to hold wealth lightly, to share generously, and to place ultimate faith not in money or property, but in God.

The New Testament offers striking examples of believers selling their homes and possessions to live communally. In the Acts of the Apostles, the earliest Christians formed a community in which no one claimed private ownership:

“All the believers were together and had everything in common. They sold property and possessions to give to anyone who had need.” (Acts 2:44–45)

Later, Acts 4:32–35 echoes this:

“No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had… There were no needy persons among them.” (Acts 4:32–35)

This model of selling homes and pooling resources was far more than an act of charity; it was a spiritual commitment to live as one family under God’s care, trusting fully that their needs would be met through shared faith and mutual support. It is a striking reminder that true discipleship demands consistency. One cannot selectively follow the words of a messenger or pick and choose which teachings to follow, embracing only the comforting teachings while ignoring the challenging ones.

This point is dramatically illustrated in the story of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1–11). As mentioned, in the early Christian community, believers sold their land and houses and brought the proceeds to the apostles to be shared among all. Ananias and his wife Sapphira sold a piece of property, but secretly kept back part of the money for themselves while pretending to donate the entire sum. When confronted by Peter, both Ananias and Sapphira lied about what they had done. Both fell dead as a sign of the seriousness of their deception.

“You have not lied just to human beings but to God.” (Acts 5:4)

This story is not merely about giving money, it shows that partial commitment and hidden selfishness were incompatible with the honesty and selflessness that the early followers were called to. Their communal life was not an optional ideal but an integral part of their faith, a visible sign that they trusted God and each other completely.

In Christianity, monastic life is a major part of Catholicism and other branches. Monasteries and convents, communities where monks or nuns live together, are found all over the world. Nuns are women who dedicate their lives to religious service, typically living under vows of poverty, chastity and obedience within a monastery or convent. There are estimated to be over 3,500 Catholic monasteries globally, with thousands more in Orthodox Christianity and other Christian denominations. The vows of poverty that monks and nuns usually take mean they give up personal property and share everything with the community. Catholic priests, although they do not always live in monasteries, often live in parish houses or rectories connected to their churches, rather than owning private homes and wealth.

Buddhism and the Sangha

For Buddha, attachment was a root cause of suffering. Buddhist monastics renounce home life altogether, leaving behind family estates, land, and wealth to live communally in monasteries, sharing food and resources in a spirit of simplicity and interdependence.

“The root of suffering is attachment.” (Dhammapada, 212)

Millions of monks and nuns follow the Buddha’s teachings on renunciation, owning only the bare essentials and relying on the community for support. Women can be monks, however they are often referred to as nuns or bhikkhunis. Both monks and nuns live in communities called Sangha, which can be exclusively male or female. ‘Company’ or ‘community’, refers to the monastic communities of monks and nuns across the Buddhist world. 

Christianity has the church as a community of believers who worship, study and support each other. Buddhism has the Sangha, the monastic community that preserves teachings and guides lay people. The Sangha has kept Buddhist texts safe over the centuries and has interpreted and taught Buddhist philosophy. The Sangha has also provided inspiration and guidance on how to live a good Buddhist life.

The Kibbutz: Then and Now

In Judaism, the Kibbutz movement in Israel reflects the same principle of communal living and shared resources, inspired by the idea that people thrive when they live and work together as equals. The word Kibbutz means ‘gathering’ in Hebrew. There are currently approximately 270 Kibbutzim across Israel.

The vision of a people living simply, rejecting excess, and putting community above the individual is not an invention, it is an ancient idea deeply rooted in spiritual traditions across cultures and centuries.

According to The Jewish Agency For Israel: “The main characteristics of Kibbutz life were shaped by the principles of collective ownership and a cooperative approach to education, culture, and social life.”

Traditionally, property and income were shared equally. Everyone worked according to their abilities and received what they needed: housing, food, education, and health care. Decisions were made democratically through general assemblies, where every member had a say in shaping community life. Traditionally, Kibbutzim were mostly self-sufficient, with a strong emphasis on collective responsibility and a shared work ethic. Work included farming, manufacturing, education, and later, tourism and high-tech industries. Children were often raised collectively in children’s houses (beit yeladim), though this practice has mostly ended.

Today, the Kibbutz movement is undergoing significant change. Many Kibbutzim have shifted from fully communal living to more privatized models, where members receive differential salaries but are guaranteed a minimum income. Responsibilities once managed collectively are now often handled by individual families.

Modern Kibbutzim vary widely in size, character, and ideology. There are around 250 Kibbutzim in Israel, home to about 125,000 people. While most are secular, about twenty are religious, and some are affiliated with Conservative or Reform Judaism. Populations typically range from 100 to 1,000 members, often spanning multiple generations, and include many new immigrants.

Hinduism: The Householder’s Duty and Beyond

Hinduism recognizes life’s stages, including Grihastha (the householder stage), where one maintains a home and family responsibly. But ultimately, the higher path is to renounce even that: sages and monks (sannyasis) leave behind homes and possessions to live in simplicity, depending on the community for food and shelter. Throughout Hindu history, countless saints and spiritual teachers have lived by this idea of detachment.

“Abandon all attachment to the results of action and attain supreme peace.” (Bhagavad Gita 2:47)

“Content with what comes without effort, free from envy, beyond dualities, balanced in success and failure.” (Bhagavad Gita 4:22)

In Hinduism, monastic communities, known as ashrams and temples, practise communal living rooted in spiritual discipline rather than material gain. In these communities, private ownership is renounced, and resources such food, shelter, and donations, are shared collectively. Abandoning personal wealth is seen not as loss, but as liberation, with each member relying on the group’s generosity and the provision of God. The way of life in these places echoes the spiritual teaching found in many religions, that ultimate security and joy come not from what we own, but from our connection to something greater than ourselves.

From early Christian communes to today’s eco-villages and spiritual co-living spaces, people around the world are rediscovering a timeless truth shared by many faiths and philosophies: surrendering the burdens of private ownership and living in mutual support can offer not just economic security, but also deep spiritual nourishment.

In ancient times, early Christians formed communities where believers “held all things in common” (Acts 2:44–45), selling possessions and sharing the proceeds so that no one lacked for basic needs. Centuries later, monastic traditions across Christianity, Buddhism, and other religions embraced communal living as a path to spiritual focus and service. In Buddhist monasteries from Thailand to Tibet, monks own little more than their robes and bowls, relying on the wider community for sustenance while offering spiritual guidance in return.

Similarly, Christian intentional communities like the Bruderhof live communally, sharing income, raising children together, and rejecting individual accumulation in favor of a simple, shared life. In the U.S. and Europe, modern eco-villages like Findhorn in Scotland are inspired by both spiritual and environmental ideals, combining sustainable living with shared ownership of land and resources.

These diverse communities, whether rural Kibbutzim, Zen monasteries nestled in forested mountains, or cooperative eco-villages, all remind us that a house becomes a true home when it is opened and shared. In a world where individualism often isolates us, these communities prove that collective life, grounded in trust and mutual care, can feed both body and soul.

Given all these religious orders and communities, what is so strange about offering members the opportunity to be part of a community and monk-like lifestyle? Just like in Christianity every believer is free to choose to believe from their homes or to join the monastery.

What is the Ultimate Goal?

The ultimate goal is the establishment of a Divine Just State where God's rulership is present. Within this state, nobody will be in need at all, and it will be a rarity to find a poor person to whom charity can be given.

The ideal community is one where people share in all things, and individuals do not have to worry about their daily sustenance. This is a community founded on justice and equality, where all resources are used to fulfill the needs of all people.

Imam Ahmed Al-Hassan stresses that human beings must give up selfishness and prioritize others over themselves, leading to a world of light where no one is poor, in need, hungry, or scared. This altruism is seen as the most important human endeavour, with the well-being of one's brother and sister coming first.

The community is envisioned to be like a beehive, where members work together and automatically help one another without sensitivities. If one person makes a mistake, it is a shared responsibility for the group, emphasizing that "we are all one."

This practice is rooted in historical and religious precedents, such as the early church in the Book of Acts, where believers sold their homes and lands and gave the money to the apostles to establish a community. Similarly, early Muslims brought their wealth and gold to the Prophet Muhammad.

If the Qa’im were to ask you for all your gold, would you walk away like the young rich man did with Jesus? Or would you drop it at his feet like the dust it is?